THE PHENOMENON OF DAMPING I N STRANDED CABLES
**
I. Pivovarov and O.G. Vinogradov
The L e r s i t y of Calgary
Calgary, A l b e r t a , Canada
Abstract
H y s t e r e t i c l o o p s and f r e q u e n c y response c u r v e s
of a c a n t i l e v e r c a b l e having a c o n c e n t r a t e d mass
a t t h e f r e e end a r e i n v e s t i g a t e d e x p e r i m e n t a l l y
nd modelled m a t h e m a t i c a l l y . Experimental o b s e r -
.
' c a t i o n s show t h a t h y s t e r e t i c l o o p s a r e frequency
e
and a m p l i t u d e dependent. To d e s c r i b e d i f f e r e n t
damping mechanisms two n o n l i n e a r mathematical
models a r e p o s t u l a t e d : t h e f i r s t model t a k e s i n t o
a c c o u n t t h e n o n l i n e a r s t i f f n e s s and v i s c o u s and
Coulomb t y p e of damping, t h e second model i n a d d i -
t i o n t o v i s c o u s damping i n c l u d e s t h e Davidenkov ' s
d e s c r i p t i o n of a h y s t e r e t i c l o o p w i t h s h a r p edges.
These two models d e s c r i b e h y s t e r e t i c l o o p s w i t h
d i f f e r e n t shapes. It i s shown that t h e shape of a
h y s t e r e t i c loop does not a f f e c t s i g n i f i c a n t l y t h e
f r e q u e n c y r e s p o n s e of t h e system a s long a s t h e
energy b a l a n c e d u r i n g t h e c y c l e i s s a t i s f i e d . How-
e v e r , n e i t h e r of t h e models s i m u l a t e s t h e shapes of
h y s t e r e t i c loops adequately within t h e studied
r a n g e of f r e q u e n c i e s and a m p l i t u d e s .
I. Introduction
Hysteretic l o s s e s i n stranded cables a r e
caused by i m p e r f e c t i o n of t h e m a t e r i a l which
s t r a n d s a r e made of and i n t e r n a l f r i c t i o n between
the strands. T h i s combination of m a t e r i a l and
s t r u c t u r a l p r o p e r t i e s r e s u l t i n g i n a s i n g l e hys-
t e r e t i c l o o p d u r i n g t h e c y c l i c deformation makes
t h e phenomenon of damping q u i t e complicated and
d i f f i c u l t f o r analytical description.
The e x i s t i n g mathematical s i m u l a t i o n of c a b l e
dynamics i s based on l i n e a r models: l i n e a r s t i f f -
n e s s and l i n e a r v i s c o u s damping. The l i m i t a t i o n s
of l i n e a r models a r e e v i d e n t . Viscous damping i s
f r e q u e n c y a e p e n d e n t but amplitude-independent,
w h i l e damping d u e t o f r i c t i o n between t h e s t r a n d s
i s frequency-independent , but amplitude-dependent.
Bending s t i f f n e s s a l s o c a n n o t be taken a s l i n e a r .
The l a t t e r i s confirmed by e x p e r i m e n t a l observa-
t i o n s and t h e o r e t i c a l a n a l y s i s ( l , 2 , 3 ) .
The m o t i v a t i o n behind t h i s r e s e a r c h is t o
c l a r i f y t h e i n f l u e n c e of v a r i o u s damping mechan-
i s m s I n c a b l e s s u b j e c t e d t o bending. S i n c e i t is
i m p o s s i b l e t o s e p a r a t e l o s s e s d u e t o frequency-
and a m ~ l i t u d e - d e p e n d e n t n o n c o n s e r v a t i v e f o r c e s t h e
phenomenological approach i s u t i l i z e d : t h e e x p e r i -
mental d a t a concerning b o t h t h e dynamic r e s p o n s e of
a c a n t i l e v e r c a b l e and c o r r e s p o n d i n g h y s t e r e t i c
l o o p s i s used f o r d e v e l o p i n g a mathematical model
which i s t h e n checked a g a i n s t t h e experimental r e -
s u l t s . Note t h a t u s u a l l y a mathematical model i s
based o n f r e q u e n c y c u r v e s o n l y . ~ a z a n ( ~i n) d i c a t e s
* l y n o n l i n e a r s i n c e subharmonic and h i g h harmonic
Research A s s o c i a t e , Department of Mechanical
Engineering.
**
Associate Professor, Department of Mechanical
Engineering .
Copyright @ American lnslitutc of Aeronautin and
Astronaulin. Inc.. 1985. All righUresewed.
fig5 - 383%
t h a t t h e shape of a h y s t e r e t i c l o o p i s v e r y impor-
t a n t i n d e s c r i b i n g t h e damping f o r c e s p r o p e r l y .
Our i n t e n t i o n h e r e is t o v e r i f y t o which e x t e n t t h e
shape of a h y s t e r e t i c l o o p e f f e c t s t h e dynamic be-
h a v i o u r of t h e s t r u c t u r a l system.
,Y
The b r i e f o u t l i n e of t h e paper is a s f o l l o w s :
f i r s t l y , t h e r e s u l t s of e x p e r i m e n t a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n
of t h e dynamic r e s p o n s e and corresponding h y s t e r e t i c
l o o p s a r e g i v e n , t h e n , two n o n l i n e a r mathematical
models a r e i n t r o d u c e d and some t h e o r e t i c a l r e s u l t s
a r e p r e s e n t e d , and, f i n a l l y , t h e d i s c u s s i o n f o l l o w s .
XI. Experimental I n v e s t i g a t i o n
A c a n t i l e v e r c a b l e composed of 19 w i r e s and
having a c o n c e n t r a t e d mass a t t h e f r e e end was sub-
j e c t e d t o k i n e m a t i c harmonic e x c i t a t i o n on t h e
Unholz-Dicke C o r p o r a t i o n Shaker c o n t r o l l e d by a BK
Automatic V i b r a t i o n E x c i t e r C o n t r o l 1025. Two ac-
c e l e r o m e t e r s , o n e mounted on t h e base of t h e s h a k e r
and t h e o t h e r on t h e mass, allowed t o measure both
t h e dynamic r e s p o n s e and t h e h y s t e r e t i c loop. The
s i g n a l s were processed by t h e T e k t r o n i x 5223 Digi-
t i z i n g O s c i l l o s c o p e and recorded on t h e Hewlet-
Paccard 7004B X-Y Recorder.
The a m p l i t u d e v s frequency r e s p o n s e d a t a f o r
t h r e e l e v e l s of e x c i t a t i o n i s g i v e n i n Fig. 1. It
is s e e n t h a t t h e maximum a m p l i t u d e s s h i f t t o t h e
l e f t i n d i c a t i n g t h e n o n l i n e a r c h a r a c t e r of dynamic
response. The amplitude jump phenomenon can be
easily identified.
H y s t e r e t i c l o o p s a r e shown i n Fig. 2 f o r v a r -
i o u s f r e q u e n c i e s and d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s of e x c i t a t i o n .
I n t h e c a s e of kinematic e x c i t a t i o n t h e h y s t e r e t i c
l o o p i s expressed i n terms of a b s o l u t e a c c e l e r a t i o n
v s r e l a t i v e displacement of t h e mass. The v a r i a -
b i l i t y of l o o p s h a p e s i s v e r y much pronounced. I t
i s s e e n that w h i l e frequency i n c r e a s e s t h e shape of
a h y s t e r e t i c l o o p changes from that w i t h s h a r p
edges ( n o n l i n e a r h y s t e r e t i c loop due t o d r y f r i c t i o n
o r i n e l a s t i c i t y ( 4 ) ) t o t h e one of e l l i p s e - l i k e t y p e
(due t o l i n e a r v i s c o u s f o r c e s ) . The d a t a on F i g . 2
i n d i c a t e t h a t a t l e a s t two damping mechanisms, d r y
and v i s c o u s f r i c t i o n , a r e p r e s e n t , and t h a t t h e
f r i c t i o n - t y p e damping dominates a t low f r e q u e n c i e s
whereas t h e v i s c o u s - t y p e one dominates a t h i g h f r e -
quenc i e s .
The n o n l i n e a r t y p e of c a b l e s t i f f n e s s s u g g e s t s
t h a t subharmonics and high harmonics should be pre-
s e n t i n t h e frequency r e s p o n s e spectrum of t h e .
h a r m o n i c a l l y e x c i t e d mass. T h i s was v e r i f i e d by
means of BK High R e s o l u t i o n S i g n a l Analyzer Type
2033 f o r t h e r a n g e of f r e q u e n c i e s and a m p l i t u d e s of
e x c i t a t i o n s p e c i f i e d i n Fig. 2. The r e s u l t s , show
t h a t w i t h i n t h e s e l i m i t s t h e s y s t e m d e h a v e s a s weak-
components were found t o be. n e g l i g i b l y small.
Summing up t h e experimental o b s e r v a t i o n s i t may
be concluded t h a t t h e system under c o n s i d e r a t i o n i s
weakly n o n l i n e a r a s f a r a s frequency r e s p o n s e i s
 5 I0 I5 20 25
FREQUENCY, Hz

Fig. 1 Amplitude v s frequency (experimental data).

,A.. frequency increasing
OOA, frequency decreasing

F R E Q U E N C Y , Hz

Fig. 2 Hysteretic loop v s frequency for d i f f e r e n t amplitues of e x c i t a t i o n .

concerned but shows s t r o n g l y n o n l i n e a r h y s t e r e t i c
l o o p s w i t h s h a r p edges a t resonances.
111. Mathematical Models
Experimental o b s e r v a t i o n s i n d i c a t e that t h e r e
should be v a r i o u s t y p e s of damping mechanisms
c a u s i n g l o s s e s i n c y c l i c a l l y bent c a b l e s . Two
mathematical models a r e i n t r o d u c e d h e r e phenomeno-
l o g i c a l l y t o d e s c r i b e t h e system: 1 ) t h e noncon-
s e r v a t i v e v i s c o u s and d r y f r i c t i o n f o r c e s a r e sup-
plemented by n o n l i n e a r r e s t o r i n g f o r c e , and 2) t h e
n o n c o n s e r v a t i v e v i s c o u s f o r c e is used i n combina-
t i o n w i t h t h e Davidenkov's e x p r e s s i o n s f o r a non-
l i n e a r h y s t e r e t i c l o o p w i t h s h a r p edges(5). For
b o t h models t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of parameters is
based on t h e e q u i v a l e n t l i n e a r i z a t i o n techniques(6)
which i s j u s t i f i e d f o r weakly n o n l i n e a r systems.
Model 1
The governing d i f f e r e n t i a l e q u a t i o n f o r t h e
f i r s t model i s a s f o l l o w s ( 3 ) :
+ ysgnj + 6u + w 2u - 3
Bu / l u l = dou2 s i n u t
where u i s t h e r e l a t i v e , w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e
clamp, displacement of t h e mass, do i s t h e ampli-
t u d e of e x c i t a t i o n , w i s t h e n a t u r a l a n g u l a r f r e -
quency of a l i n e a r system, v i s t h e a n g u l a r f r e -
quency of e x c i t a t i o n , and y , 6 and 6 a r e c o n s t a n t s .
Note, that lul i n t h e denominator i s introduced t o
s o f t e n t h e e f f e c t of n o n l i n e a r s t i f f n e s s f o r r e l a -
t i v e l y l a r g e a m p l i t u d e s . The procedure of i d e n t i -
f i c a t i o n of f o u r parameters: p, 6 , f3 and w based
on e x p e r i m e n t a l f r e q u e n c y r e s p o n s e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
is described i n t h e next section.
Equation (1) e q u i v a l e n t l y l i n e a r i z e d h a s t h e
f o l l o w i n g form:
where
and Q(uo), we(uo) i s t h e e q u i v a l e n t damping and
stifffiess, respectively, i s t h e amplitude of
o s c i l l a t i o n , and = yIw2?8 = 6/w, = @/w2,
;= V / W a r e d i m e n s i o n l e s s parameters.
c.
The a m p l i t u d e uo i s found from t h e f o l l o w i n g
a l g e b r a i c equation:
-2 2 -2
where a 4 = 166 I n , a 3 = ~ d ( ; ~ - l ) l r , = g
1 , a = I , a = I 2 a4: 2
u do-
- -
Model 2
The governing d i f f e r e n t i a l e q u a t i o n f o r t h e
second model i s t a k e n i n t h e form:
2
d v sinvt (6)
where 6 , w , y and n a r e c o n s t a n t s , upper s i g n s i n
b r a c e s correspond t o t h ? c a s e when &0, and lower
s i g n s t o t h e c a s e when u<O.
The term i n b r a c e s i s t h e Davidenkov's expres-
s i o n f o r two branches of a h y s t e r e t i c l o o p i n t h e
c a s e of a symmetric deformation. T h i s e x p r e s s i o n
d e s c r i b e s a h y s t e r e t i c l o o p w i t h s h a r p edges
w h i l e a t t h e same time a c c o u n t i n g f o r n o n l i n e a r
stiffness.
S i n c e t h e system i s weakly n o n l i n e a r i t i s
t a k e n t h a t n=3 i n Eq. (6) and t h e l a t t e r t h e n can
b e w r i t t e n i n t h e f o l l o w i n g form:
2
d v sin vt
Equation (7) a f t e r a p p l y i n g t h e procedure of
(1) e q u i v a l e n t l i n e a r i z a t i o n i s reduced t o :
+6 ( u ) + w *2 2
(u0) u = v d sin ut (8)
where
The amplitude of o s c i l l a t i o n i s governed by t h e f o l -
lowing a l g e b r a i c e q u a t i o n :
where
T h e o r e t i c a l response c u r v e s were o b t a i n e d by
s o l v i n g n u m e r i c a l l y Eqs. (5) and (11) f o r e a c h o f
t h e models. T h e o r e t i c a l h y s t e r e t i c l o o p s were
determined by s o l v i n g Eqs. (1) and (7) a s i n i t i a l
v a l u e problems u s i n g t h e Runge-Kutta method. Equa-
t i o n s (1) and (7) were supplemented by Fhe follow-
ing i n i t i a l conditions: u ( o ) = uo and u ( o ) = 0 ,
where uo t h e amplitude o f a p e r i o d i c s o l u t i o n found
b e f o r e by a v e r a g i n g procedure f o r any g i v e n £re'-
quency u. The computations were c a r r i e d o u t u n t i l
t h e h y s t e r e t i c loop became s t a b l e , and u s u a l l y i t
+ r e q u i r e d few c y c l e s of k i n e m a t i c e 5 c i t a t i o n .
f
T h e o r e t i c a l frequency f e s p o n s e c u r v e s f o r two
models ( s o l i d l i n e f o r model 1 and broken l i n e f o r
model 2) a r e shown i n Fig. -3. I n Fig. 4 t h e o r e t i -
c a l h y s t e r e t i c l o o p s f o r two models a r e given.
 5 I0 I5 20 25
FREQUENCY, H z

Fig. 3 Amplitude vs frequency.

r ~ .. m o.. . o .. experiment
-
-, theory model 1; theory model 2 - - --
---, theoretical backbone curve

IV. Identification of Parameters

The identification of parameters of mathemati-

cal models is based on the assumption that the fre-
quency response characteristics of a real system
are known.
Model 1
7
Experimental data in Fig. 1 shows that for any
levehof excitation there is a minimum frequency
below which the system is insensitive to excita-
tion. This can be called the limit of system in-
sensitivity. Model 1 reflects this quality of
the system. If a, = 0 in Eq. (5) then uo = 0 is
the solution defining the insensitivity limit. SO
r' from the condition a, = 0 follows
Another parameter can be found by identifying ex-
perimentally the so-called backbone curve, the
natural frequency vs amplitude relationshi The
equation describing the backbone curve is(pj :
-* *
where v , u is the resonance frequency and ampli-
tude, respe&ively.
From equations (14) and (4) the expression
for the parameter 0 follows:

In order to identify parameter GQhe polynomial in

equation (5) is written-ifi the form:
At frequency ;2 Gi the system does not dissipate
any energy.

Equation (12) allows to find the value of

parameter p if for any do-the value of vi is known
from the experiment. So 11 is as follows:
 I I I I I I I I I I I
12 13 14 15 I6 17 18 19 20 21 22
FREQUENCY , Hz

Fig. 4 H y s t e r e t i c l o o p s v s frequency f o r amplitude of e x c i t a t i o n d = 0.09 mm

.....
-
experiment
, t h e o r y , model 1
----, t h e o r y , model 2

* -
It i s s e e n t h a t when u = uo-and v = v e q u a t i o n
-* l i k e f o r t h e model 1.
( 1 6 ) , a f t e r s u b s t i t u t i g n o f 0 from e q u a t i o n ( I S ) ,
i s reduced t o An e x p r e s s i o n f o r parameter y follows from
Eqs. (14) and (10):

From t h i s and e q u a t i o n (13) a n e x p r e s s i o n f o r

follows:
* *
where v , uo a r e frequency and amplitude, respec-
t i v e l y , c o o r d i n a t e s of a p o i n t on a backbone curve.
I n o r d e r t o i d e n t i f y t h e l a s t parameter 6 t h e poly-
nomial (11) i s w r i t t e n i n t h e form:

The l a s t p a r a m e t e r t o b e found i s t h e n a t u r a l f r e -
quencpw o f a l i n e a r system. T h i s c a n be d e t e r -
mined by e x t r a p o l a t i n g t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y o b t a i n e d
backbone c u r v e t o i t s i n t e r s e c t i o n w i t h t h e f r e -
quency a x i s .
From Eq. (19) i t f o l l o w s t h a t f o r t h e p o i n t s on a
Model 2 backbone c u r v e t h e second t e r m i n s q u a r e b r a c k e t s
d i s a p p e a r s s o t h a t t h e polynomial (20) i s reduced
T h i s model does n o t d i s p l a y a n i n s e n s i t i v i t y
a t low frequency. Indeed, i f Co = 0 i n Eq. (11)
t h e n uo = 0 i s a s o l u t i o n . So t h e c o n d i t i o n Co =
0 d e f i n e s t h e i n s e n s i t i v i t y l i m i t and i n t h i s c a s e
t h i s l i m i t i n g frequency e q u a l s z e r o . The r e s u l t s -
of computation shown i n Fig. 3 confirm t h a t . S o l v i n g f o r 6 one o b t a i n s :

The n a t u r a l frequency w of a l i n e a r system

i s determined by e x t r a p o l a t i n g t h e backbone c u r v e
 V. D i s c u s s i o n and Conclusions
As i t i s known, a h y s t e r e t i c l o o p r e v e a l s t h e
t r u e , a s opposed t o t h e a v e r a g e d , p r o p e r t i e s of a
dynamic s y s t e m d u r i n g one c y c l e o f deformation.
r e f l e c t s b o t h t h e n o n l i n e a r s t i f f n e s s and v a r i o u s
damping mechanisms. I n view o f t h i s i t i s impor-
t a n t t o know t o which e x t e n t t h e t r u e c h a r a c t e r i s -
t i c is i m p o r t a n t i n t h e dynamic a n a l y s i s .
r
Two models a n a l y s e d i n t h i s s t u d y a r e q u a l i -
t a t i v e l y d i f f e r e n t . Model 1, d e s c r i b e d i n r e o l o g i -
c a l t e r m i n o l o g y , can b e r e p r e s e n t e d by a n o n l i n e a r
s p r i n g , a d a s h p o t and a Coulomb s l i p element.
Whereas model 2 can b e r e p r e s e n t e d by a dashpot
and a c o n t i n u o u s l y d i s t r i b u t e d system o f Coulomb
s l i p e l e m e n t s , producing t o g e t h e r a n i n e l a s t i c e f -
fect.
The f r e q u e n c y r e s p o n s e c u r v e s a r e o f major i n -
t e r e s t i n s t r u c t u r a l dynamics. These c u r v e s o b
t a i n e d t h e o r e t i c a l l y f o r two models a r e compared
w i t h e x p e r i m e n t a l d a t a i n Fig. 3. It i s c l e a r l y
s e e n t h a t two models g i v e s a t i s f a c t o r y d e s c r i p -
t i o n o f a r e a l one-degree-of-freedom system. At
t h e same t i m e t h e comparison made i n F i g . 4 shows
t h a t h y s t e r e t i c l o o p s f o r two models d i f f e r from
e a c h o t h e r and e x p e r i m e n t a l ones. The d i s c r e p a n c y
i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e shape of t h e loop s i n c e f o r
b o t h models t h e a m p l i t u d e s and t h e e n e r g y l o s t
d u r i n g t h e c y c l e i s i n goo-d-agreement a s it f o l l o w s
from t h e f r e q u e n c y r e s p o n s e d a t a . It means t h a t
f o r a one-degree-of-freedom system t h e s h a p e o f t h e
h y s t e r e t i c l o o p i s n o t t h a t i m p o r t a n t from t h e
s t r u c t u r a l mechanics p o i n t o f view, but r a t h e r
t h e i n t e g r a l l o s s e s d u r i n g one c y c l e a r e i m p o r t a n t .
The development o f a n a d e q u a t e m a t h e m a t i c a l
model o f a v i b r a t i n g c a b l e remains, however, o f
interest. The f i r s t i n d i c a t i o n o f model adequacy
i s t h e s c a t t e r of its p a r a m e t e r s determined from
e x p e r i m e n t a l d a t a . It i s c l e a r t h a t a s i m p l e
l i n e a r model would r e q u i r e d i f f e r e n t p a r a m e t e r s f o r
d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s o f e x c i t a t i o n . For t h e model 1
t h e s c a t t e r o f p a r a m e t e r s p, 6 and 0 i s shown i n
Table 1 f o r t h r e e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e amplitudes of
excitation. Considering t h e n a t u r a l s c a t t e r of
T a b l e 1 S c a t t e r o f p a r a m e t e r s f o r model 1
e x p e r i m e n t a l d a t a t h e m a t h e m a t i c a l model r e p r e -
P s e n t e d b y Eq. (1) seems r e a s o n a b l e , and i t f o l l o w s
t h e n t h a t t h e p a r a m e t e r s remain t h e same w i t h i n
t h e s p e c i f i e d r a n g e o f f r e q u e n c i e s and a m p l i t u d e s .
F o r t h e second model, however, t h e s c a t t e r o f para-
meters shown i n T a b l e 2 had a d i f f e r e n t p a t t e r n ,
t h e most e v i d e n t i s t h e change o f t h e s i g n o f
p a r a m e t e r 6 a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e v i s c o u s damping.
S i n c e n e g a t i v e s i g n i s b a s i c a l l y meaningless f o r
a s y s t e m under c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h e o n l y c o n c l u s i o n
i s t h a t t h e model 2 is v a l i d f o r s m a l l e r r a n g e o f
a m p l i t u d e s t h a n t h a t a n a l y s e d . Probably o n l y
Table 2 S c a t t e r o f p a r a m e t e r s f o r model 2
0.180 0.270
It
0.873 0.512 0.262
Davidenkov's t e r m would b e enough t o r e t a i n i n Eq.
(6) t o d e s c r i b e t h e o s c i l l a t i o n s w i t h h i g h ampli-
tudes. The v a r i a b i l i t y o f p a r a m e t e r s i n Eq. (6) i s
a n i n d i c a t i o n t h a t damping p r o p e r t i e s of t h e c a b l e
are f r e q u e n c y and a m p l i t u d e dependent. It s h o u l d be
n o t e d a l s o t h a t f o r 6<0 t h e h y s t e r e t i c l o o p s c o u l d
n o t be computed by u s i n g t h e Runge-Kutta method,
s i n c e t h e i n i t i a l v a l u e problem became u n s t a b l e .
Summarizing t h e above r e s u l t s i t can be con-
c l u d e d t h a t two n o n l i n e a r m a t h e m a t i c a l models des-
c r i b e d by Eqs. (1) and ( 6 ) g i v e r e a s o n b l y good re-
s u l t s a s f a r a s frequency response curves a r e
concerned. However, t h e s i m u l a t i o n of h y s t e r e t i c
l o o p s i s less r e a l i s t i c . The v a r i e t y o f s h a p e s o f
h y s t e r e t i c loops observed i n experiments i n d i c a t e
t h a t damping i s a more c o m p l i c a t e d phenomenon and
p o s s i b l y c a n b e s i m u l a t e d i f i n Eq. (6) c o e f f i c i e n t s
, 6 and y a r e c o n s i d e r e d a s f r e q u e n c y a n d / o r ampli-
t u d e dependent. T h i s , however, r e q u i r e s f u r t h e r
analysis.
Acknowledgements
The f i n a n c i a l a s s i s t a n c e provided by t h e
N a t u r a l S c i e n c e s and E n g i n e e r i n g Research C o u n c i l
o f Canada i n t h e form o f o p e r a t i n g g r a n t No. A-1481
i s g r a t e f u l l y acknowledged.
References
R. C l a r e n and G. ~ i a n a ,Mathematical A n a l y s i s
o f T r a n s m i s s i o n L i n e V i b r a t i o n , IEEE Trans-
a c t i o n s o n Power A p p a r a t u s and Systems, 8 8 , 1 2 ,
1969, pp. 1741-1767.
H. Wagner, V. Ramamurti, R.V.R. S a s t r y a n d K.
Hartman, Dynamics o f S t o c k b r i d g e Dampers, J.
o f Sound and V i b r a t i o n , 3O(2), 1973, pp. 207-
220.
0. Vinogradov and I. P i v o v a r o v , N o n l i n e a r
P r o p e r t i e s o f S t o c k b r i d g e Dampers, Dept. o f
Mech. Engg., U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l g a r y , Rep. 312,
1984, p. 29.
B.J. Lazan, Damping o f M a t e r i a l s and Members i n
S t r u c t u r a l Mechanics, Pergamon P r e s s , 1968.
G.S. P i s a r e n k o , D i s s i p a t i o n o f Energy D u r i n g
Mechanical V i b r a t i o n , I z d a t e l ' s t v o Academii
Nauk U k r a i n s k o i S.S.R., Kiev, 1962 ( i n R u s s i a n ) .
N. M i n o r s k i , N o n l i n e a r O s c i l Z t i o n s , K r i e g e r ,
1974. C
B